About your Search

20130201
20130228
STATION
MSNBC 8
MSNBCW 8
CSPAN 4
CSPAN2 3
LANGUAGE
English 34
Search Results 0 to 33 of about 34 (some duplicates have been removed)
. >> deserving or not senate majority leader harry reid who enjoys a "b" rating from the nra seems to have decideed already which of the president's proposals have the best chance to become law. reid indicated on the abcs "this week" that at least two of those proposals had a chance. >> i think we need to take a look at the federal trafficking i think that everyone acknowledges that we should do something about background checks. >> john: but sought weapons? >> i'll take a look at it. >> john: someone is working on their "a" rating from the nra. and the majority leader seemed less interested in a ten-round limit for ammunition clips. >> i think that's something that we definitely have to take a look at. >> take a look or vote for? >> well, let's see what it is. let's see what it is. >> john: in case someone in the senate doesn't know what it is. what it is or seems to be the democratic senate leader running for cover when pressed to do something about guns. on two other big issues reid seems employeer confident that an immigration bill would pass, and the majority leader also told abc that
congress act on the nondiscrimination act. i hate to beat up on harry reid more than i already have this month, but let me do that right now. why do you think harry reid is refusing to bring this to the floor to vote. >> it's been three years since harry reid promised he would bring that to the floor to vote hasn't stated a reason. i don't know what the reason is, and no one can explain it, but the good news out of the white house position on the executive order is that they point to the senate, they point to the house and say they should act. we say we agree. we would love for the white house legislative team to lobby aggressively with harry reid to bring up that vote. we think there is important public education when you hold a vote. a great debate that is 90% of americans mistakenly believe this has already passed congress. we have public education to do and that senate vote would help. >> john: the lobbying could be just a phone call to harry reid. is there renewed urgency with the sequester about it take place with the fear of the layoff of federal employees. >> we know as you
. harry reid said i made a deal with mcconnell it's going to be ok. the republicans aren't going to filibuster. dick durbin said at the time: cenk: positive environment, the republicans aren't going to filibuster anymore. they got a deal, so we didn't have to take it away. what happened today when senator hagel, a republican up for secretary of defense? the republicans filibustered. >> on this vote, the aye58 the nays 40, one senator announced present. 50% of the senators not having voted in the affirmative, the motion is not agreed to. cenk: even though 58 senators say yes let's end the debate and confirm him nope, not going to end the debate, because the republicans filibustering. now harry reid is shocked to find out that the republicans were not true to their word! >> the republicans have made an unfortunate choice to up the level here in washington. just when you thought things couldn't get worse, it gets worse. we need this vote today. why? times like this, it's nice to have a secretary of defense. cenk: man, harry reid, oh, you're killing 'em you're killing 'em take it eas
, your thoughts on this. i mean, isn't this harry reid's fault? harry had a chance to change the rules of the senate and he was too nice to mitch mcconnell and now look what we've got. there's probably more to come. your thoughts. >> i suppose so, though i remember not very long ago when we were all suffering under the george w. bush administration and there was a real fear that without the filibuster then george bush would have been able to put some of his very radical extremists on the bench and push through more of his agenda. so i understand the reticence to kind of unleash the nuclear option. and you know, i don't think you can necessarily blame harry reid for the unprecedented not just obstructionism but kind of paranoid lunacy of this new crop of senators who, you know, before i think we used to see this sort of incredibly paranoid mccarthyite apocalyptic view of american foreign policy among some of the characters in the house -- >> doesn't that make the case for why harry should have done, this because of the ted cruzes of the world and the tea parties of the world? they're tr
debate, then we might not be having this debate right now. the deal harry reid cut with mitch mcconnell is coming back to bite them. they could have gone for a lot more. they backed off. they shook hands again and went with something milder and then boom, he gets clowned two mornts later. >> nia malika, i want to be real clear. the filibuster has been around for decades. but its use has exploded in this past few years. in fact, two of the three sessions of congress with the worst filibuster abuse have happened under president obama. so let me just cut to the chase. is the gop's obstruction about policy? or is it just something personal about president obama. >> well, it's probably a little bit of both. it's about policy. it's about this president whose policies they vehemently disagreed with. harry reid had a chance to go for a more full-throated filibuster. but his reasoning was that when the democrats are in the majority -- in the minority and that could happen, this next election, that they want to have that same leverage that republicans have been using with this filibuster r
hill correspondent kelly o'donnell. you're watching it all from up there. what do we know? harry reid was on the floor today talking about it. we know that he needs five republicans to break, and there is a distinction between those who might be willing to vote for cloture to break the filibuster, but would still plan to vote against him when he would only at that point need just 50 to be confirmed, 51 to be confirmed. >> there is a lot of drama in this, andrea, and it gets complicated. it does come down to that. there are many more republicans that would beotology in the first step support ending the debate, taking the actual vote and then voting against hagel because everyone knows he already has publicly enough votes to be confirmed. we're in this period now where the drama is unfolding over a couple of key things. a group of republicans want information on two subjects. part of that coming from hagel related to past speeches, financial details, that they feel they did not get enough of during his confirmation process and the hearing where many people even his supporters say he did
majority leader harry reid had to switch his vote to know to bring the vote back up again after the senate comes back from recess. you have a lot of republican senators who said as recently as last week that they did not want to see the choice filibuster. even if they wanted to vote no, he at least deserved an uptown vote to be approved. there was no precedent -- precedent to filibuster president's choice like this. the republicans decided they wanted to try to use this vote as a way to extract more information from the white house on the issues like the terrorist attack on benghazi in september. they submitted to passing hagel when they come back. it way you're looking at, is delaying the inevitable. chuck hagel will be confirmed as defense secretary. he is just going to get to wait 11 days. to me, it seems like you should confirm him, because you're going to confirm him anyway. it is just another delay in what the senate is trying to do. harry reid set a new vote for tuesday, in 11 days. what do republicans want to see in the meantime? guest: they say they would like answers again from t
, they call it on harry reid and a famous pianist tries to get old creatures to act young again. the grapevine is next. ♪ ♪ >>. >> chris: and now fresh picking from the political grapevine. fact check.org found harry reid was wrong by claiming, quote. that the american people need to understand it's nothing not as if we have done nothing for the debt. $2.6 trillion already we've made in cuts. all those cuts have come from non-defense programs. the fact check organization says only $1.4 trillion have the deficit reduction was in spending cuts. the rest came from tax hikes. >>> a seven-year-old colorado boy has been suspended from cool for lobbing an imaginary grenade in order to save the planet. he did not threaten anyone but violated the school's list of absolutes which forbids weapons real or pretend. his mother doesn't think it's realistic important second graders but the school district tells the herald newspaper the story is more complicated than being portrayed. >> finally as the associated press puts it, no wonder they are in danger. galapagos for advertises aluminum period around wh
't need the tax loopholes to avoid laying off workers. >> claiming they should get harry reid to pass one of two house bills to block forced cuts. >> so for 16 months the president is travelling all over the country holding rallies instead of sitting down with senate leaders in order to try to forge an agreement over there in order to move the bill. >> we moved the bill twice. we should not move a third bill before the senate gets off their ass to begin to do something. >> reporter: the president put pressure on boehner to bring the local republican congressman aboard air force one where congressman told reporters in addition to spending cut he favors raising revenues through tax reform. >> a republican with me today. it's not always healthy for a republican but he is doing it because he knows it's important to you. he asked them to continue closing the tax loopholes instead of letting the tax cut go through. >> but boehner got air cover from mitch mcconnell who blasted the president's approach. >> he refused to offer a reasonable alternative and he threatened to veto other proposals aime
have that interest-- >> but then i say the republicans and even harry reid if he let's this bill die in the senate, the next time there is a massacre, y'all own it. president obama is promising new gun control legislation, but if he doesn't it wouldn't be the first props promise he has brokenned. it was announced this week that those assigned at guantanamo bay is reassigned and no one is replacing him. was it just a complain ploy that he knew he could give up on easily if he had to. >> i know we'll get comments saying that you had obama apologizists on the show, but i think it's one of those instances, and we talked about it earlier on the show this week that he had this naive ideal that he could go in and close it it. and when he got in and saw all the difficulties of everything that had to be in place for that to happen, it fell apart. >> john: he couldn't use the bully pulpit? >> there has been a lot of coverage of what happened over the last four years. the process was started and it was not going to work out. literally, he couldn't do anything. >> john: is that fair enough to s
. senate majority leader harry reid cuttings off debate, calling for lawmakers to make a decision. now republicans are threatening to block that vote saying they have some unanswered questions. a few of them spoke with our mike emanuel, chief congressional correspondent. first start off with what harry reid, the top democrat in the senate is saying about all this. this morning he was quite emotional about what is going on. till us about that. >> reporter: jenna, that's right. harry reid has 55 democrats in the senate who would vote to move forward with the chuck hagel nomination, confirmation process. the bottom line though he needs 60. so he needs five republicans to come along to get past that procedural hurdle. he doesn't have those five. so harry reid is frustrated. >> mr. president, in less than two hours our country will be without a secretary of defense at a time when we have a war going on in afghanistan, and about 70,000 troops there. we have a nuclear weapon was detonated in north korea. >> reporter: a nuclear test was done in north korea and 66,000 troops in afghanistan but
, harry reid, and said this is the solution. >> all right. meanwhile, senator lindsay graham is suggesting one potential -- >> i'm sorry, could i interrupt? i had a munchkin in my mouth. >> no, you can't have those. you're supposed to have your greek yogurt. >> i'm trying to make a point with a visual aid. this is like defense spending. done. gone. >> before the day has even started, you've just -- give those to me. >> i'm not homer simpson. what do you make of what woodward said? >> the president's in charge. he's got to figure out a way to stop the sequester. i think the symbolism of the last couple weeks haven't been great. he's not really out there leading a new path towards figuring out how to avoid something he says is a bad idea and promised as a candidate wouldn't happen. >> okay. john, joe's mouth is full. what do you think? >> i'm hap think the sequester be a bad thing. >> everyone says that. who's going to take the blame? who should? >> if it ends up going into effect, i think they're all going to take a lot of blame and they should. it's fair enough to say, if bob's reporting i
you think you should be going after harry reid as well? >> well, listen. i think harry reid has been clear that he will bring this for a vote. there's a bipartisan group of members of congress working on this issue, in particular universal background checks. and i don't think that democrats are the issue here. there are a number of republicans including self-proclaimed moderates who have yet to commit to support something that has the support of 90% of americans. columbine may not have happened if we had universal background checks. those guns were purchased at a gun show without checks. this won't solve every issue but it'll go a long way in terms of addressing the problem. >> great to see you. >>> i want to bring in our friday political power panel. gang, it's great to have you all here. let's dive into sequestration because it's just so fun. david brooks' article in the "new york times" saying the president hasn't come up with a proposal to avert sequestration let alone one that is politically plausible. peggy noonan in "the wall street journal" is saying it's always cliff ceiling
for the republicans and harry reid. >> they did not filibuster them. >> that sets a dangerous precede precedent. >> by the way, alex, i blame harry reid and the democrats, too. we had a chance at the beginning of the congress. we had a chance to make real filibuster reform and we took a pass. >> okay. you make a good point there. let's listen to john mccain talking about immigration. here it is. >> the president, obviously has some thoughts about immigration reform which he drafted and guided his agencies to comment on. if the president proposes legislation, do you think it will fail? >> of course. of course it will. that is why we are working together, republicans and democrats, by the way he had no communications with the congress. i believe we are making progress in a bipartisan basis. >> does this sound like republicans saying no for any of the president's proposals? >> no. >> no. >> my problem with president obama is alex, he does not negotiate with republicans. he doesn't bring the leadership up to talk to him. he doesn't make phone calls. >> does he do that with democrats? >> that is tru
. i don't think it does sound, but let's vote on it. to harry reid, the house, it has try to fix ceqa station. we have done nothing in the senate. -- to fix sequestration. we have done nothing in the senate. we are not doing anything in the senate. so, harry, please take the president's proposal or come up with one of your own. put it on the floor and let's start voting. if you do not like what we are doing, come up with your own. we have our fingerprint as republicans on this sequestration idea. it was the president's idea that we come as the republican party agreed to it. we got in this mess together and we will have to get out together. mr. president, helped lead us. -- help lead us. and on like anybody else on this stage, you are the commander in chief -- unlike anyone else on this stage. do you really want your legacy to be that you let the american congress into a deal that would destroy the military at the time it would need it the most? do you want to pivot to asia? how do you do that with 232 ships? when about iran acquiringhave you modernize the f-16 and the f-18? had you go
votes will be problems for harry reid and the senate? these are issues that are going to come over here at some point. don't you -- hold up the process if he's having trouble on these tough issues? >> the legislative process was designed to be inefficient and difficult. so that if congress were able to move a bill through both houses and could agree upon a bill, it would actually become a law. so at the start of every session there are always a number of issues that carry over from the prior session. and frankly there's a lot of scar tissue that carries over with a lot of these bills. it's up to congress to figure out where the common ground is and how to deal with it. let me make clear i don't like the sequester. i think it's taking a meat ax to our government. meat ax to many programs and will weaken our national defense. that's why i fought to not have the sequester in the first place. but the president didn't want to have to deal with the debt limit again before his re-election. it was the president and senate democrats who committed to working with us to get an outcome out of the s
's be honest about why harry reid did that. they were going in recess. if reid held the vote on friday and they got cloture, they would not have had a final vote on him until saturday or sunday. he was accommodating the republicans and the democrats' senate schedule. >> oh, no. >> let's be very clear. >> what's so wrong with voting after the recess? what's so wrong with -- >> why not vote now? is he qualified now? if he is, he's qualified today, thursday and tomorrow. he's qualified. if he's not qualified, vote against him. >> let's take a listen right now with both of you to john mccain on thursday. kristen, i'll get you to respond right after. >> to be honest with you, it goes back to there's a lot of illwill towards senator hagel because when he was a republican he attacked president bush mercilessly, at one point said he was the worst president since herbert hoover, said that the surge was the worst mrunter since the vietnam war, which is nonsense. and was very anti his own party and own people. people don't forget that. you can disagree but if you're disagreeable, people don't for
out on this question, i agree with senator harry reid. when it came to the nomination of john bold, and in a of members of this body asked for additional disclosures from john bolton, and those disclosures were not forthcoming. harry reid said the following, the administration stonewalling has no one had the effect of slowing down the confirmation process, it has also put a further cloud over this individual and perhaps unnecessarily, raised the impression that the nominee and the white house have something to hide. i don't know if mr. hagel has received funds directly or indirectly from foreign sources, from extreme sources, but his refusal to provide disclosure i think is highly troubling. and i would suggest every member of this committee and every member of this body should stand together and at least insisting on adequate disclosure. i'll make one final point. some have asked, would you make the same request of a republican nominee? i'll point out you can chuck hagel is a republican. i don't know him personally, unlike many members of this committee. isa limit was record, and
in prison for what they are doing to our country. >> stephanie: oh, my. she is on a tear today. harry reid. >> republicans are too busy fighting amongst themselves and instead they do nothing. >> i'm sorry if you have to hear like this. >> i have offered him many times jim to work on his outside void. >> i'm livid, i'm sorry you have to see me this way. i'm beside myself. >> stephanie: okay. he makes senator mitch mcconnell look like some sort of a -- like a mad man. nicolas cage of the senate. >> you wouldn't like me when i'm angry, i turn green -- oh wait i already am. >> he wasn't elected to work for the congress he wants. he was elected to work with the congress he has. >> stephanie: yep. yep. >> and he tries to work with them and over and over again -- >> stephanie: he tried to work with the douche nozzles he has, however -- pardon me? >> you don't go to war with the army you wish you had. you go to war with a count try you never should have started a war with in the first place. [ applause ] >> thank you. >> stephanie: a moment of honesty. >> yeah. >> stephanie: when we com
has a proposal. i don't think it's sound, but let's vote on it. to harry reid, the house, we have done nothing in the senate. it is one thing to be the world's most deliberate body. it is another thing to be the most absent. we are not doing anything in the senate, so harry reid, please come up with one of your own proposals, put it on the floor, let's start voting. if you don't like what we are doing, come up with your own plan. now, as john said, republicans own this proposal on the sequestration idea. it was the president's idea, according to bob woodward broke, that we would agree to it. we got in this mess together, and we are going to have to get out the way and do it together. you are the commander in chief. do you really want a deal to destroy the military at the time we need it the most? you want to do that with asia? what about the low number of ships we have? if you exempt personnel, have you modernize the f16 and f18. our enemies would love this to happen. i am sure that iran is very supportive of sequestration. i am sure that al qaeda training camps all over the world woul
have barack obama who is a democrat, president of the united states. then we have harry reid who is the majority leader. so the democrats are in control of both. now, if you think back at what happened back in -- during the last bush administration, we had exactly the reverse. george bush was president of the united states and the democrats were a minority. same situation. so what happened? first of all, we had bolton come up, john bolton. same thing, subjected to a 60-vote margin. we had steve -- dirk kempthorne. all remember dirk kempthorne. there are a lot of people who did not approve of him. he was appointed by bush, a republican, and then when he came over here, the democrats didn't like him, they subjected him to a 60-vote margin. that wasn't a filibuster. this isn't a filibuster today. people are trying to say that and blame me as being the bad guy that's causing a filibuster. it's not the case at all. any more than it was the case back in the 2005-2006 and other times when we had a nominee that was put forth by president bush. it was objected to by the democrats. now, di
Search Results 0 to 33 of about 34 (some duplicates have been removed)